Writing a doctoral thesis is a testament to years of anxiety, excitement, confusion, terror and passion. A thesis is, however, much more than just an output of learning. It is a formative process through which a doctoral student learns what it means to be a researcher. The doctoral thesis as a form of academic writing has, however, received scant attention in organisational studies. My decision to write my thesis differently inspired me to think deeply about the conventions and procedures of doctoral writing. How is it that doctoral students write? What conventions govern them? And how could doctoral writing be done differently to expand the boundaries of thought in management? In this article, I give an autoethnographic account of how I wrote my thesis differently to provide the groundwork for doctoral students to reconsider the conventional approach to doctoral writing. Ultimately, I offer guidance and points of reflection for how doctoral students and their supervisors might break with writing conventions and contribute to their learning as emerging management researchers through writing the doctoral thesis differently.
This article draws on an eight‐month ethnography in a feminist social justice organization that supports survivors of domestic violence and shares the storytelling practices that fostered solidarity. These storytelling practices stemmed from decades of decolonizing work undertaken by Māori women to have their knowledge and ways of being equally integrated into the organization. The storytelling practices, grounded in Māori knowledge, emphasized that the land is actively productive of our identity and knowledge; our actions and beliefs are part of a non‐chronological intergenerational inheritance; the personal is collective. I contend that these practices fostered solidarity and situated feminism in a collective history of localized struggle. Accordingly, this article expands our imaginative capacity for how solidarity can be thought of and fostered between feminists in different contexts.
INTRODUCTION:Economic abuse has the potential to have far-reaching consequences for victims, but is largely invisible within discourses on violence against women. While it is internationally recognised as a pervasive and highly gendered method for abusers to gain and maintain control over women, there is no research specifically on economic abuse in Aotearoa New Zealand. AIM:This study aimed to understand the experiences and effects of economic abuse for women in Aotearoa New Zealand, particularly in relation to methods of coercive control, with the intention of developing risk matrices to be used by practitioners. METHODS:We conducted a survey with 448 respondents-with 398 the focus of analysis for this article. The survey contained a combination of scaling and open-ended questions. This article reports findings of a qualitative analysis of aspects from responses to open-ended questions. FINDINGS:Abusers employed a range of abusive methods to restrict victims' freedom and exercise domination. These abusive behaviours seemed to follow traditional hegemonic constructions of masculinity as synonymous with "provider" in that many of these methods relied on the reproduction of gendered stereotypes which subjugate women to a subordinate position in the household. Women experienced a range of adverse emotional impacts as a result of this abuse. CONCLUSIONS:We found that, in reality, abusers relied on these stereotypes to justify the appropriation of women's resources and consequent removal of women's financial autonomy while, paradoxically, the women described providing for the household on greatly restricted finances-whether through paid or unpaid labour. We have translated these findings into risk matrices to assist the identification of economic abuse.
In this article, we explore how time and temporality shape the identities of early career researchers as they learn to become academics. We engage in a collaborative autoethnography to reflect on how our shared identities as middle-class women and our divergences in age, ethnicity, familial status and sexuality shaped our embodied experiences of becoming academics. Drawing on the concept of queer time, we reconceptualise the becoming of newcomers as they learn (or do not learn) to belong to academia. We illustrate how queer time interrupts normative ideas of newcomer learning as progress, development and reproduction. We suggest that learning may alternatively be understood as ‘moments of friction’ and ‘moments of opportunity’ in which newcomers to the academy feel out of step, out of place and out of time. We conceptualise these moments as simultaneously painful yet productive of possibilities for learning to become an academic, differently.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.